.

.
Library of Professor Richard A. Macksey in Baltimore

POSTS BY SUBJECT

Labels

Saturday, July 21, 2012

Nathuram Godse Killed Mahatma Gandhi to Save Hindus and India!


Nathuram Godse Killed Mahatma Gandhi to Save Hindus and India?

by MTN

Most people know the name of Nathuram Godse as a killer of Mahatma Gandhi. This is how the whole world remembers him every year on death anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi on 30th January. However, there has been lots of contradictions about why Godse had to kill Gandhi and what were the real reasons behind Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination. Most of these reasons haven indeed been talked about in the past as well but not so openly. That is to only to make Godse always look like a accused and Gandhi as a mere victim. However, when the whole story and underlying reasons are seen with a different perspective, then it ofcourse leads to unearthing of newer facts and analysis. This is what which has been kept hidden from being talked openly so as to keep the image of Mahatma Gandhi and his ideology of non-violence unquestionable always. However, the very fact that lots of plays, dramas and even movies have been released on this controversial topic itself proves that there is indeed other side of story remained untold. Let us try to go through the who background, story and real motives behind Mahatma Gandhi’s murder by Nathuram Godse. Well, whole analysis is based upon the existing information on the topic as available in various online and offline resources.
why-Nathuram-godse-killed-mahatma-gandhi

NATHURAM GODSE – BACKGROUND, FAMILY, EARLY LIFE

Nathuram Godse’s full name was Nathuram Vinayak Godse and he was born on 19th May 1910 in the city of Pune, India and died on 15 November 1949. He was a Hindutva activist and journalist, who was the assassin of Mahatma Gandhi. Along with his brother Gopal Godse and six other co-conspirators, he executed a plot to assassinate Gandhi.
Nathuram Godse was born in Baramati बारामती, Pune District in a Chitpavan Brahmin family. His father, Vinayak Vamanrao Godse, was a post office employee and his mother was Lakshmii (née Godavari). At birth, he was named Ramachandra.

How Nathuran Godse Got His Name

There is quite an interesting story on how Nathuram Godse got his name. Nathuram was given his name because of an unfortunate incident. Before he was born, his parents had three sons and a daughter, with all three boys dying in their infancy. Fearing a curse that targeted male children, young Ramachandra was brought up as a girl for the first few years of his life, including having his nose pierced and being made to wear a nose-ring (“Nath” in Marathi). It was then that he earned the nickname “Nathuram” (literally “Ram with a nose-ring”). After his younger brother was born, they switched to treating him as a boy.

Nathuram Godse was a Homosexual?

However, other biographers dismiss the above story, together with claims that Godse was a homosexual, as a fabrication by the Congress Party of India, meant to exploit the prejudices against transvestites and homosexuals in conservative Indian society in order to demonize Godse.

Nathuram Godse Schooling and Education

Nathuram Godse attended the local school at Baramati through the fifth standard, after which he was sent to live with an aunt in Pune so that he could study at an English-language school. During his school days, he highly respected Gandhi. In 1930, Nathuram’s father was transferred to the town of Ratnagiri.

GODSE’S ENTRY TO POLITICS

Godse dropped out of high school and became an activist with Hindu nationalist organizations such as the Hindu Mahasabha, and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), although the RSS has claimed he left during the mid-1930s, almost 20 years prior to the assassination. They were particularly opposed to the separatist politics of the All India Muslim League. Godse started a Marathi newspaper for Hindu Mahasabha called Agrani, which some years later was renamed. Hindu Rashtra. The Hindu Mahasabha had initially backed Gandhi’s campaigns of civil disobedience against the British government.

WHAT MADE NATHURAM GODSE AGAINST MAHATMA GANDHI

Nathuram Godse rejected Gandhi, after what he saw as Gandhi’s repeated sabotage against the interests of Hindus by using the “fasting unto death” tactic on many issues. In Godse’s view, Gandhi was giving into Muslim interests in ways that seemed unfair and anti-national. He blamed Gandhi for the Partition of India, which left hundreds of thousands of people dead in the wake of religious unrest.

Gandhi’s Non-Violence Made Godse so Violent that He Killed Bapu

Godse was against Gandhi’s personal teachings of extreme or absolutist non violence. He thought that such non-violent ideology would lead to Hindus losing the will to fight against other religions, which he saw as a matter of self-defense, and thereby becoming permanently enslaved. This has been said to be one of the major reasons behind his decision to kill Gandhi.

ASSASSINATION OF MAHATMA GANDHI [HOW GODSE KILLED GANDHI]

Godse approached Gandhi on January 30, 1948 during the evening prayer and bowed. One of the girls flanking and supporting Gandhi, Abha Chattopadhyay, said to him, “Brother, Bapu is already late” and tried to put him off but he pushed her aside and shot Gandhi in the chest three times at point-blank range with a semi-automatic pistol. Gandhi died almost immediately. After shooting, Godse did not try to run or threaten anyone else. He was attacked and pinned to the ground by the crowd around him and was subsequently arrested when a small group of police officers arrived on the scene a few minutes later.
nathuram-godse-killing-mahatma-gandhi-photos

GODSE’S COURT TRIAL

Following the assassination of Mohandas Gandhi, he was put on trial beginning May 27, 1950 at Peterhoff, Shimla which housed the Punjab High Court.
On November 8 1950, Godse delivered his statements in court enunciating the reasons and motives for the assassination.

GODSE’S REPLY ON WHY HE KILLED GANDHI (AS ANSWERS TO THE CHARGE SHEET FILED)

Godse narrated all the reasons that led to killing of Mahatma Gandhi in the form of his answers to the charge sheet filed against him. Below are the excerpts from different but main sections of his answers to the charge sheet.
nathuram-godse-reply-speech-on-how-and-why-killed-gandhi

Nathuram Godse’s Answer to Charge Sheet (Excerpts from Para. 26, 27)

Below is an excerpt of Godse’s answer to the charge sheet filed against him on Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination.
As I grew up I developed a tendency to free thinking unfettered by any superstitious allegiance to any isms, political or religious. That is why I worked actively for the eradication of untouchability and the caste system based on birth alone. I openly joined anti-caste movements and maintained that all Hindus are of equal status as to rights, social and religious, and should be considered high or low on merit alone and not through the accident of birth in a particular caste or profession. I used publicly to take part in organized anti-caste dinners which thousands of Hindus, Brahmins, Vaishyas, Kshatriyas, Chamars and Bhangis participated. We broke the caste rules and dined in the company of each other.
He listed Dadabhai Naoroji, Swami Vivekananda, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Bal Gangadhar Tilak as his influences, along with the ancient and modern histories of India, England, France, America and Russia, and the tenets of Socialism and Marxism.
Below is the para 28 of his answer to the charge sheet;
All this reading and thinking brought me to believe that above all it was my first duty to serve the Hindudom and the Hindu people, as a patriot and even as a humanitarian. For, is it not true that to secure the freedom and to safeguard the just interests of some thirty crores of Hindus constituted the freedom and the well-being of one fifth of human race ? This conviction led me naturally to devote myself to the new Hindu Sanghatanist ideology and programme which alone I came to believe, could win and preserve the national independence of Hindusthan, my Motherland and enable her to render true service to humanity as well.

Nathuram Godse Dismissed Gandhi’s Non-Violence Policy

He dismissed Gandhi’s policies of truth and non-violence as “nothing new or original” and considered them “implicit in every constitutional public movement”. He defended the use of righteous violence against aggression and quoted the examples of Shivaji, Rana Pratap and Guru Govind Singh. He rebuked Gandhi for his “self-conceit” for condemning them as misguided patriots. However, Gandhi had referred to the issue in a completely different way.

He accused Gandhi of paradoxically being a “violent pacifist” who brought calamities to the country through non-violence. According to Godse, Gandhi developed a “subjective mentality under which he alone was to be the final judge of what was right or wrong” and accused him of having too much power.

Nathuram Godse, Answer to the Charge Sheet (Excerpt from Para. 69)

Below is an excerpt from Para 69 of Godse’s answer to the charge sheet;
If the country wanted his leadership, it had to accept his infallibility; if it did not, he would stand aloof from the Congress and carry on in his own way. Against such an attitude there can be no halfway house. Either Congress had to surrender its will to his and had to be content with playing second fiddle to all his eccentricity, whimsicality, metaphysics and primitive vision, or it had to carry on without him. He alone was the judge of everyone and everything; he was the master brain guiding the Civil Disobedience movement; no other could know the technique of that movement. He alone knew when to begin it and when to withdraw it. The movement might succeed or fail, but that could make no difference to the Mahatma’s infallibility. ‘A Satyagrahi can never fail’ was his formula for his own infallibility and nobody except himself knew what a Satyagrahi is.

Godse Accused Gandhi of Insane and Pro-Muslim Policies

Godse rebuked Gandhi’s “childish insanities and obstinacies”. According to Godse, Gandhi did not allow any room for people to disagree with his “irrational” policies. Thus, Godse held Gandhi’s irresponsibility as the cause of “blunder after blunder, failure after failure, and disaster after disaster”. He also accused Gandhi of having a blatant pro-Muslim policy and quoted Gandhi’s support for Hindustani (Hindi-Urdu) (which was synonymous to Urdu) as the national language of India after the Muslims objected to Hindi and claimed that all of Gandhi’s experiments were at the expense of the Hindus.

Nathuram Godse, Answer to the Charge Sheet (Para. 35)

Gandhiji began to hold his prayer meetings in a Hindu temple in Bhangi Colony and persisted in reading passages from Quoran as a part of the prayer in that Hindu temple in spite of the protest of the Hindu worshippers there. Of course he dared not read the Geeta in a mosque in the teeth of Muslim opposition. He knew what a terrible Muslim reaction would have been if he had done so. But he could safely trample over the feelings of the tolerant Hindu. To this belief I was determined to prove to Gandhiji that the Hindu too could be intolerant when his honour was insulted.
He explained that Gandhi’s unfair treatment and hypocrisy was the cause of his anger.

Nathuram Godse, Answer to the Charge Sheet (Para. 48)

The fact that Gandhiji honoured the religious books of Hindus, Muslims and others or that he used to recite during his prayers verses from the Geeta, the Quoran and Bible never provoked any ill will in me towards him. To my mind it is not at all objectionable to study comparative religion. Indeed it is a merit.

Gandhi’s Bias towards Muslims, Pakistan and Support for Separation of Sind

He quoted numerous examples of Gandhi’s bias such as the fast for the payment of Rs. 55 crores to Pakistan, his support for the Khilafat movement and the invasion of India by the Amir of Afghanistan, his denunciation of the Arya Samaj which included several nationalist leaders, his silence over the subsequent murder of Swami Shraddhanand by a Muslim, his support for the separation of Sind, his placation of Jinnah and the Muslim League, his denial of slaughter and forced conversion of Hindus by Muslims in the Moplah Riots despite evidence to the contrary, opposition to the singing of Vande Mataram, his contrasting treatment of Hindu and Muslim princes, support for cow-slaughter, opposition to Shivaji’s Flag, his hypocrisy over the violent Quit India movement (by his call to “Do or Die”), among others. (Para. 69).
Godse firmly believed in a secular State and was opposed to the supremacist demands of the Muslim League (Para 51).
Godse accused Gandhi of infatuation with the Muslim League even after the massacre of Hindus by Muslims after Direct Action Day and despite their increasing disloyalty and treason to the Interim Government. He also denounced the Congress, which had boasted of its “nationalism and secularism”, of surrendering to Jinnah and accepting Pakistan at the “point of the bayonet”.

What Gandhi Called Non-Violence was the Most Violent Time in History

Godse accused Gandhi for much of the violence that happened in the country during 1960 and 1948 and tried to make a point that Gandhi’s non-violence policy was nothing more than a fake. This is what he answered in the charge sheet in Para 69w.
Nathuram Godse, Answer to the Charge Sheet (Para. 69w, 91, 140)
This is what Gandhiji had achieved after thirty years of undisputed dictatorship and this is what the Congress Party calls ‘Freedom’. Never in the history of the world has such slaughter been officially connived at or the result described as Freedom, and ‘Peaceful Transfer of power’ If what happened in India in 1946, 1947 and 1948 is to be called peaceful one wonders what would be the violent. Hindu Muslim Unity bubble was finally burst and a theocratic and communal State dissociated from everything that smacked of United India was established with the consent of Nehru and his crowd and they have called it `Freedom won by them at sacrifice’. Whose sacrifice?

Godse Accused Gandhi of being Father of Pakistan and not of India

According to Godse, Gandhi did not impose any conditions on Muslims because Jinnah and the Muslim League were not at all perturbed or influenced by his fasts and attached no value to his voice. He also criticized Gandhi’s epithet “The Father of India” for failing in his paternal duty as he consented to its partition. He claimed Gandhi failed in his duty and proved to be the father of Pakistan.
His inner-voice, his spiritual power, his doctrine of non-violence of which so much is made of, all crumbled against Jinnah’s iron will and proved to be powerless.
He criticized Gandhi’s non-violent policy during the communal clashes:
“We should with a cool mind reflect when we are being swept away. Hindus should never be angry against the Muslims even if the latter might make up their minds to undo even their existence. If they put all of us to the sword, we should court death bravely, may they, even rule the world, we, shall inhabit the world. At least we should never fear death. We are destined to be born and die; then why need we feel gloomy over it? If all of us die with a smile on our lips, we shall enter a new life. We shall originate a new Hindustan.”

Godse Killed Gandhi to save Hindus

Had this act not been done by me, of course it would have been better for me. But circumstances were beyond my control. So strong was the impulse of my mind that I felt that this man should not be allowed to meet a natural death so that the world may know that he had to pay the penalty of his life for his unjust, anti-national and dangerous favouritism towards a fanatical section of the country. I decided to put an end to this matter and to the further massacre of lacs of Hindus for no fault of theirs. May God now pardon him for his egoistic nature which proved to be too disastrous for the beloved sons of this Holy Land.
— Nathuram Godse, Answer to the Charge Sheet (Para. 140)
Godse foresaw that he would be hated by the people, his future would be totally ruined, and that he would lose all his honour, which he held more valuable than his life, if he were to assassinate Gandhi. However, he considered that Indian politics in Gandhi’s absence would be practical, able to retaliate and be powerful with the armed forces, and that “the nation would be saved from the inroads of Pakistan”.
He then confessed that he fired the shots at Gandhi on January 30 1950, on the prayer-grounds in Birla House.
I do say that my shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to millions of Hindus. There was no legal machinery by which such an offender could be brought to book and for this reason I fired those fatal shots. I bear no ill will towards anyone individually, but I do say that I had no respect for the present government owing to their policy, which was unfairly favourable towards the Muslims. But at the same time I could clearly see that the policy was entirely due to the presence of Gandhi.
— Nathuram Godse, Answer to the Charge Sheet (Excerpt from Para. 135)

Godse Accused Nehru as well for being Instrumental in creation of Pakistan

He then accused Prime Minister Nehru of hypocrisy with his speeches of secularism, because he was instrumental in creating the Islamic state of Pakistan along with Gandhi’s persistent policy of appeasement towards the Muslims.

GODSE’S CONFESSION OF GANDHI’S MURDER

This is what Godse said while confessing on why he killed Gandhi and denying any mercy or help for this from any one in this matter.
Finally, I now stand before the court to accept the full share of my responsibility for what I have done and the judge would, of course, pass against me such orders of sentence as may be considered proper. But I would like to add that I do not desire any mercy to be shown to me, nor do I wish that anyone should beg for mercy on my behalf. My confidence about the moral side of my action has not been shaken even by the criticism levelled against it on all sides. I have no doubt that honest writers of history will weigh my act and find the true value thereof someday in future.
— Nathuram Godse, Answer to the Charge Sheet (Para. 150)

COURT’S DECISION AND STATEMENT OVER GODSE’S TRIAL AND STATEMENTS (BY JUSTICE KHOSLA)

In the light of the statement, Justice Khosla commented :
The highlight of the appeal before us was the discourse delivered by Nathuram Godse in his defence. He spoke for several hours, discussing, in the first instance, the facts of the case and then the motive, which had prompted him to take Mahatma Gandhi’s life.
The audience was visibly and audibly moved. There was a deep silence when he ceased speaking. Many women were in tears and men coughing and searching for their handkerchiefs. The silence was accentuated and made deeper by the sound of an occasional subdued sniff or a muffled cough…
I have however, no doubt that had the audience of that day been constituted into a jury and entrusted with the task of deciding Godse’s appeal, they would have brought in a verdict of ‘not guilty’ by an over-whelming majority.’

EXECUTION – GODSE WAS HANGED ON 15 NOVEMBER 1949

On November 8, 1949, Godse was sentenced to death. Among those calling for commutation of the death sentence for the defendants were Jawaharlal Nehru, as well as Gandhi’s two sons, who felt that executing their father’s killers would dishonour his memory and legacy which included a staunch opposition to the death penalty. Godse was hanged at Ambala Jail on November 15, 1949 along with Narayan Apte, the other conspirator. Savarkar was also charged with conspiracy in the assassination of Gandhi, but was acquitted and subsequently released.

AFTERMATH – RSS BAN AND DENIAL ABOUT GODSE’S RSS MEMBERSHIP

Millions of Indians mourned Gandhi’s assassination. The Hindu Mahasabha was vilified and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the RSS, was temporarily banned. However, investigators could find no evidence that the RSS bureaucracy had formally sponsored or even knew of Godse’s plot. The RSS ban was lifted by Prime Minister Nehru and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel in 1949.
The RSS, to this day denies any connection with Godse, and disputes the claim that he was a member.
After the assassination, many criticized the Indian government for not doing more to protect Gandhi who, earlier in the week, had been the target of a bomb plot by the same conspirators who later shot him. Of particular concern, was the fact that a Bombay detective had wired the names and descriptions of the assassins along with the fact that they were known to be in Delhi stalking Gandhi. On the other hand, Gandhi had repeatedly refused to cooperate with his own security and had resigned himself to a violent death which he accepted as an inevitable part of his destiny.

PLAYS, DRAMAS AND MOVIES ON MAHATMA GANDHI’S ASSASSINATION BY NATHURAM GODSE (FROM GODSE’S POINT OF VIEW)

Till date, there have been many instances when this topic has been dramatized in the form of plays and movies. Below are the some of the plays and movies which were created from the point of view of Godse again hinting that there indeed was the other side of the story.
A film, Nine Hours to Rama, was made in 1963 and was based on the events leading up to the assassination, seen mainly from Godse’s point of view. The film Hey Ram, made in 2000, also briefly touches upon events related to the assassination. The popular Marathi language play Mee Nathuram Godse Boltoy (Marathi: मी नथुराम गोडसे बोलतोय)(“I am Nathuram Godse, Speaking”) was also made from Godse’s point of view.

BOOKS ON NATHURAM GODSE’S POINT OF VIEW [BUY AND DOWNLOAD]

Three books were based on Nathuram Godse in which the author narrated his life story and why he assassinated Gandhi. But the books were banned by government. The books were: 1. Why I assassinated Mahatma Gandhi, published by Surya Bharti, Delhi, India, 2003. ISBN 1-375-09979-6 2. May it Please your Honor!, published by Surya Bharti, India, 2003 3. Gandhi Vadh aur Main(Gandhi Hatya Aani Me) by his brother Gopal Godse in 1989.

Nathuram Godse’s Final Address to the Court.


Gandhiji’s assassin, Nathuram Godse’s Final Address to the Court.

WHY I KILLED GANDHI - Nathuram Godse's Final Address to the Court.
WHY I KILLED GANDHI - Nathuram Godse's Final Address to the Court.
Nathuram Godse was arrested immediately after he assassinated Gandhiji, based on a F. I. R. filed by Nandlal Mehta at the Tughlak Road Police staton at Delhi . The trial, which was held in camera, began on May 27, 1948 and concluded on February 10, 1949. He was sentenced to death.
An appeal to the Punjab High Court, then in session at Simla, did not find favour and the sentence was upheld. The statement that you are about to read is the last made by Godse before the Court on the May 5, 1949.
Such was the power and eloquence of this statement that one of the judges, G. D. Khosla, later wrote, “I have, however, no doubt that had the audience of that day been constituted into a jury and entrusted with the task of deciding Godse’s appeal, they would have brought a verdict of ‘not Guilty’ by an overwhelming majority”
WHY I KILLED GANDHI
Born in a devotional Brahmin family, I instinctively came to revere Hindu religion, Hindu history and Hindu culture. I had, therefore, been intensely proud of Hinduism as a whole. As I grew up I developed a tendency to free thinking unfettered by any superstitious allegiance to any isms, political or religious. That is why I worked actively for the eradication of untouchability and the caste system based on birth alone. I openly joined RSS wing of anti-caste movements and maintained that all Hindus were of equal status as to rights, social and religious and should be considered high or low on merit alone and not through the accident of birth in a particular caste or profession.
I used publicly to take part in organized anti-caste dinners in which thousands of Hindus, Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, Chamars and Bhangis participated. We broke the caste rules and dined in the company of each other. I have read the speeches and writings of Ravana, Chanakiya, Dadabhai Naoroji, Vivekanand, Gokhale, Tilak, along with the books of ancient and modern history of India and some prominent countries like England , France , America and Russia . Moreover I studied the tenets of Socialism and Marxism. But above all I studied very closely whatever Veer Savarkar and Gandhiji had written and spoken, as to my mind these two ideologies have contributed more to the moulding of the thought and action of the Indian people during the last thirty years or so, than any other single factor has done.
All this reading and thinking led me to believe it was my first duty to serve Hindudom and Hindus both as a patriot and as a world citizen. To secure the freedom and to safeguard the just interests of some thirty crores (300 million) of Hindus would automatically constitute the freedom and the well-being of all India , one fifth of human race. This conviction led me naturally to devote myself to the Hindu Sanghtanist ideology and programme, which alone, I came to believe, could win and preserve the national independence of Hindustan , my Motherland, and enable her to render true service to humanity as well.
Since the year 1920, that is, after the demise of Lokamanya Tilak, Gandhiji’s influence in the Congress first increased and then became supreme. His activities for public awakening were phenomenal in their intensity and were reinforced by the slogan of truth and non-violence which he paraded ostentatiously before the country. No sensible or enlightened person could object to those slogans. In fact there is nothing new or original in them.. They are implicit in every constitutional public movement. But it is nothing but a mere dream if you imagine that the bulk of mankind is, or can ever become, capable of scrupulous adherence to these lofty principles in its normal life from day to day.
In fact, honour, duty and love of one’s own kith and kin and country might often compel us to disregard non-violence and to use force. I could never conceive that an armed resistance to an aggression is unjust. I would consider it a religious and moral duty to resist and, if possible, to overpower such an enemy by use of force. [In the Ramayana] Rama killed Ravana in a tumultuous fight and relieved Sita.. [In the Mahabharata], Krishna killed Kansa to end his wickedness; and Arjuna had to fight and slay quite a number of his friends and relations including the revered Bhishma because the latter was on the side of the aggressor. It is my firm belief that in dubbing Rama, Krishna and Arjuna as guilty of violence, the Mahatma betrayed a total ignorance of the springs of human action.
In more recent history, it was the heroic fight put up by Chhatrapati Shivaji that first checked and eventually destroyed the Muslim tyranny in India . It was absolutely essentially for Shivaji to overpower and kill an aggressive Afzal Khan, failing which he would have lost his own life. In condemning history’s towering warriors like Shivaji, Rana Pratap and Guru Gobind Singh as misguided patriots, Gandhiji has merely exposed his self-conceit. He was, paradoxical as it may appear, a violent pacifist who brought untold calamities on the country in the name of truth and non-violence, while Rana Pratap, Shivaji and the Guru will remain enshrined in the hearts of their countrymen for ever for the freedom they brought to them.
The accumulating provocation of thirty-two years, culminating in his last pro-Muslim fast, at last goaded me to the conclusion that the existence of Gandhi should be brought to an end immediately. Gandhi had done very good in South Africa to uphold the rights and well-being of the Indian community there. But when he finally returned to India he developed a subjective mentality under which he alone was to be the final judge of what was right or wrong. If the country wanted his leadership, it had to accept his infallibility; if it did not, he would stand aloof from the Congress and carry on his own way.
Against such an attitude there can be no halfway house. Either Congress had to surrender its will to his and had to be content with playing second fiddle to all his eccentricity, whimsicality, metaphysics and primitive vision, or it had to carry on without him. He alone was the Judge of everyone and every thing; he was the master brain guiding the civil disobedience movement; no other could know the technique of that movement. He alone knew when to begin and when to withdraw it. The movement might succeed or fail, it might bring untold disaster and political reverses but that could make no difference to the Mahatma’s infallibility. ‘A Satyagrahi can never fail’ was his formula for declaring his own infallibility and nobody except himself knew what a Satyagrahi is. Thus, the Mahatma became the judge and jury in his own cause. These childish insanities and obstinacies, coupled with a most severe austerity of life, ceaseless work and lofty character made Gandhi formidable and irresistible.
Many people thought that his politics were irrational but they had either to withdraw from the Congress or place their intelligence at his feet to do with as he liked. In a position of such absolute irresponsibility Gandhi was guilty of blunder after blunder, failure after failure, disaster after disaster. Gandhi’s pro-Muslim policy is blatantly in his perverse attitude on the question of the national language of India . It is quite obvious that Hindi has the most prior claim to be accepted as the premier language. In the beginning of his career in India , Gandhi gave a great impetus to Hindi but as he found that the Muslims did not like it, he became a champion of what is called Hindustani.. Everybody in India knows that there is no language called Hindustani; it has no grammar; it has no vocabulary. It is a mere dialect, it is spoken, but not written. It is a bastard tongue and cross-breed between Hindi and Urdu, and not even the Mahatma’s sophistry could make it popular. But in his desire to please the Muslims he insisted that Hindustani alone should be the national language of India . His blind followers, of course, supported him and the so-called hybrid language began to be used. The charm and purity of the Hindi language was to be prostituted to please the Muslims. All his experiments were at the expense of the Hindus.
From August 1946 onwards the private armies of the Muslim League began a massacre of the Hindus. The then Viceroy, Lord Wavell, though distressed at what was happening, would not use his powers under the Government of India Act of 1935 to prevent the rape, murder and arson. The Hindu blood began to flow from Bengal to Karachi with some retaliation by the Hindus. The Interim Government formed in September was sabotaged by its Muslim League members right from its inception, but the more they became disloyal and treasonable to the government of which they were a part, the greater was Gandhi’s infatuation for them. Lord Wavell had to resign as he could not bring about a settlement and he was succeeded by Lord Mountbatten. King Log was followed by King Stork. The Congress which had boasted of its nationalism and socialism secretly accepted Pakistan literally at the point of the bayonet and abjectly surrendered to Jinnah. India was vivisected and one-third of the Indian territory became foreign land to us from August 15, 1947.
Lord Mountbatten came to be described in Congress circles as the greatest Viceroy and Governor-General this country ever had. The official date for handing over power was fixed for June 30, 1948, but Mountbatten with his ruthless surgery gave us a gift of vivisected India ten months in advance. This is what Gandhi had achieved after thirty years of undisputed dictatorship and this is what Congress party calls ‘freedom’ and ‘peaceful transfer of power’. The Hindu-Muslim unity bubble was finally burst and a theocratic state was established with the consent of Nehru and his crowd and they have called ‘freedom won by them with sacrifice’ – whose sacrifice? When top leaders of Congress, with the consent of Gandhi, divided and tore the country – which we consider a deity of worship – my mind was filled with direful anger.
One of the conditions imposed by Gandhi for his breaking of the fast unto death related to the mosques in Delhi occupied by the Hindu refugees. But when Hindus in Pakistan were subjected to violent attacks he did not so much as utter a single word to protest and censure the Pakistan Government or the Muslims concerned. Gandhi was shrewd enough to know that while undertaking a fast unto death, had he imposed for its break some condition on the Muslims in Pakistan , there would have been found hardly any Muslims who could have shown some grief if the fast had ended in his death. It was for this reason that he purposely avoided imposing any condition on the Muslims. He was fully aware of from the experience that Jinnah was not at all perturbed or influenced by his fast and the Muslim League hardly attached any value to the inner voice of Gandhi.
Gandhi is being referred to as the Father of the Nation. But if that is so, he had failed his paternal duty inasmuch as he has acted very treacherously to the nation by his consenting to the partitioning of it. I stoutly maintain that Gandhi has failed in his duty. He has proved to be the Father of Pakistan. His inner-voice, his spiritual power and his doctrine of non-violence of which so much is made of, all crumbled before Jinnah’s iron will and proved to be powerless. Briefly speaking, I thought to myself and foresaw I shall be totally ruined, and the only thing I could expect from the people would be nothing but hatred and that I shall have lost all my honour, even more valuable than my life, if I were to kill Gandhiji. But at the same time I felt that the Indian politics in the absence of Gandhiji would surely be proved practical, able to retaliate, and would be powerful with armed forces. No doubt, my own future would be totally ruined, but the nation would be saved from the inroads of Pakistan . People may even call me and dub me as devoid of any sense or foolish, but the nation would be free to follow the course founded on the reason which I consider to be necessary for sound nation-building.
After having fully considered the question, I took the final decision in the matter, but I did not speak about it to anyone whatsoever. I took courage in both my hands and I did fire the shots at Gandhiji on 30th January 1948, on the prayer-grounds of Birla House. I do say that my shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to millions of Hindus. There was no legal machinery by which such an offender could be brought to book and for this reason I fired those fatal shots. I bear no ill will towards anyone individually but I do say that I had no respect for the present government owing to their policy which was unfairly favourable towards the Muslims. But at the same time I could clearly see that the policy was entirely due to the presence of Gandhi.
I have to say with great regret that Prime Minister Nehru quite forgets that his preachings and deeds are at times at variances with each other when he talks about India as a secular state in season and out of season, because it is significant to note that Nehru has played a leading role in the establishment of the theocratic state of Pakistan, and his job was made easier by Gandhi’s persistent policy of appeasement towards the Muslims. I now stand before the court to accept the full share of my responsibility for what I have done and the judge would, of course, pass against me such orders of sentence as may be considered proper. But I would like to add that I do not desire any mercy to be shown to me, nor do I wish that anyone else should beg for mercy on my behalf. My confidence about the moral side of my action has not been shaken even by the criticism levelled against it on all sides. I have no doubt that honest writers of history will weigh my act and find the true value thereof some day in future.

Was Mahatma Gandhi an Illuminati Pawn?


Was Mahatma Gandhi an Illuminati Pawn?

July 20, 2012

By Timothy Watson, Ph.D.

(henrymakow.comAs a Freemason employed by MI6, Gandhi's main role was to partition India in order to set it up for future conflict.
This would serve the future depopulation agenda by fomenting regional wars. It would also justify the New World Order plan to implement world government to restore the peace.
The Illuminati used the same M.O. in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Kuwait, and a host of other divide-and-conquer national bifurcation schemes. The Illuminati relentlessly implement their motto ordo ab chao(order out of chaos). It is their teleology.
The Round Table was a world government body set up by Illuminati agent Cecil Rhodes. When Gandhi attended the Round Table Conference in 1931, Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald presented him with the Communal Award for partitioning India.
Gandhi gave a speech at the Round Table Conference promoting "Communitarianism", a buzz word used to disguise the Illuminati goal of establishing a worldwide socialist dictatorship under the cover of "communalism".




SERVANT OF EMPIRE

In the 1890's, the young Gandhi set off to London to study law. His London Diary recorded this period in his life, but all but 20 pages have mysteriously disappeared.
The surviving pages actually describe Gandhi's initiation to the Third Degree of Freemasonry in coded language, something only a Freemason scholar would notice.
The original 120-page volume would have been his Freemason diary. If the surviving 20 pages are any indication, it appears to be a record of his initiation through the various degrees of the Order.
Since he is known to have entrusted the Diary to a close family relation, the fact that it has gone missing is highly suspect. The more likely explanation is that it is being withheld from the public to conceal Gandhi's Freemason affiliations.
170px-Gandhi_Boer_War_1899.jpg(left, Gandhi in the Ambulance Corps)

Gandhi later became a sergeant major in the British Army. His ambulance team joined the British in their campaign to suppress a "Kaffir" uprising in South Africa. Gandhi acted as a recruitment officer for the British Army in the Boar War, WWI and WWII and as an apologist for the British Empire in his Indian Opinion newspaper. 
   
Gandhi was assassinated and Natharam Godse was arrested in the square before hordes of onlookers. He surrendered, compliantly raising his hands over his head and handed his weapon over to the authorities.
   
Gopal Godse, brother of Gandhi assassin, Natharam Godse, wrote a book called May It Please Your Honour based on the courtroom testimony of his brother, which the world never got to hear.
Natharam Godse conducted his own defense in order to present his true motivations. He conducted his own defense, but the Congress Party of India ensured that not a word was published in any of the Indian newspapers.
The police stole the notebooks out of the reporters' hands and destroyed them, issuing a stern warning that not a single word of his testimony be printed.
     
Godse's courtroom testimony brought tears to the eyes of the packed gallery. Sobs conveying the deep emotion of those present could be heard throughout the court. Godse testified that Gandhi was in regular correspondence with known terrorists, including the head of the Muslim League, a terrorist organization responsible for slaughtering thousands of innocent civilians, especially in Calcutta.
He also alleges that Gandhi conspired with the Amir of Afghanistan to front an invasion of India in order to found a Muslim caliphate, but that the plot was somehow thwarted. 
ng.jpegGandhi even promoted Hindustani as the lingua franca of India. Hindustani is Urdu under a different name. Godse, left, understood that this was subterfuge. It amounted to the Islamizing of India.
Forcing a foreign tongue upon a great nation like India was treasonous. Mr. Shastri, Mr. C.Y. Chintamani, the editor of Allahabad and even the Mahatma's lifelong friend, the late C.F. Andrews, confirmed that Gandhi's speeches and writings added up to an open invitation to the Amir of Afghanistan to invade India. It was de facto high treason. Is there another word for a leader plotting to have his country invaded by an alien power?
The Hindu-Muslim unity Gandhi claimed to covet so strongly was now a fleeting mirage. If Godse's defense were on public record, everyone would know the truth. If the press had not been muzzled, the word would be out.

Instead, the treasonous Congress Party suppressed the truth and prevented the face behind the mask of divinity from being revealed.
--

Timothy Watson is co-author with Col. G.B. Singh of Gandhi Under Cross-examination. Visit Tim's website www.shakesaspear.com or send him an email at apollospear@yahoo.com.

Kanye West’s “Sensual” Video for New Fashion Magazine


VIGILANT CITIZEN

Kanye West’s “Sensual” Video for New Fashion Magazine

Warning: This post contains nudity and adult subject matters.
For the launch of Anja Rubik’s new magazine, 25, photographer and director Barnaby Roper teamed up with Kanye West to make a video dedicated to the issue’s theme of eroticism. The result is, well, umm…Satanic. I can’t really find another way of  describing it, because it is neither cool, nor fun or even interesting.
Mixing Christian images with BDSM has  been done ad-nauseam by pretty much every pop star the industry decided to shove down our collective throat and this video just wants to keep it going. However, today, the industry is not about being “original”, “artistic” or even “shocking” anymore, it is about bombarding the youth with the same set of images and meanings until it is completely indoctrinated.
While it is said that the video is about making eroticism “beautiful”, most probably get the feeling that it makes eroticism appear evil and wrong. It is full of what I call “semi-subliminals”, images that are flashed for a split second but long enough to be recognized. And these images are not very pretty. Let’s look at the some of the video’s scenes.
Kanye with one eye hidden…you know what that stands for.
The video begins with Kanye saying:
“Through me, the way into the suffering city,
Through me, the way to everlasting pain,
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.”
This is an excerpt from Dante’s epic poem Inferno, specifically Canto III: The Gate of Hell. As its name states, that part of the poem describes what is written at the Gate of Hell – which is a somewhat strange introduction for a video about sexuality. It is however fitting, because the video is all about pain, suffering and evil.
The video then consists of images of people dressed in bondage with a whole lot of kaleidoscope effects. Images are quickly flashed and  many contain “shocking” symbolism. Well it was shocking in 1992. Now it is just repeated propaganda.

Topless woman posing as Jesus Christ…GENIUS! Wait, no, extremely lame.

Woman in bondage suit with cross over her face and an inverted pentagram (symbol of Satanism) in the background.

The head of Baphomet is flashed for a split second during the video.

Serpents emerging out of woman’s genitalia…Sex = Evil?

A woman getting suffocated in weird mask. Glamorizing torture and mixing it with sex is a way mass media attempts to debase the youth.

Fooling around with a skeleton (death) and a gun being shot…now that’s sexy.

Skull on woman’s genitalia…Sex = Death?

The video oddly ends with a triangle with an illuminated top, something that resembles the pyramid with all-seeing eye.
There is no in-depth analysis needed for this video: It is just a collection of clichéd images the industry keeps bombarding the youth with, juxtaposing one symbol over another and creating associations in the viewer’s minds. Why does sexuality always has to be associated with evil, violence and torture? Why does fashion always has to look like snuff films depicting live and real violence?
The answer is complex but also quite simply. It is about debasing the youth, furthering it from what is real and pure and introducing it to the elite’s perverted and twisted world